G11 and S90

[Bill Pierce]

Are the just introduced Canon G11 and S90 competition to the Leica M8 in terms of a small, carry-with-me compact for street photography, e.t.c.?

We won't really know for a few months, and, even then, there will be disagreement. But, knowing I use Leicas, folks have looked at prints on 13x19 paper from earlier cameras with small sensors and said, "Boy, that Leica makes sharp shots."

The M8 doesn't do that well at high ISO's. Between the designs possible with the short focal length lenses, less noisy sensors and computer correction of digital images, the mini cams are getting better. It's going to be an interesting race.

Already, some photojournalists are turning to the little digital minicams the way they turned to the 35mm rangefinder - that is to say with hoots of derision from users of larger cameras like the Graphic and Rollei. Will the Bressons, Haas, Erwitts and Smiths of the near future be using small sensor digitals? Will YOU be using these cameras?

This is an important question, and I hope you will chime in with your thoughts.

Bill

[johnastovall]

I've found the Ricoh GR-DII with an optical view finder to do everything my IIIG would do and much smaller and faster. I'm already looking forward to a GR-DIII.

I'll still shot the film M's because of the lenses but for a drop in the pocket when going out the Ricoh replaced the IIIG with the collasible 'Cron.

[ryan26]

I was accepted into the Eddie Adams workshop this year, which is now fully digital, yet I do not own a digital camera - So I'm facing these questions of a digital future with much frustration right now. I don't want to give up the simplicity of my M6 and 35 (or the quality of tri-x), the M8's are not a financial option (and Leica's demo's are all at the LHSA meeting during the EAW weekend), I hate the size of the DSLR's... leaving point and shoots as the least of all evils. I WILL be using these cameras.

Though I will be using my M6 whenever there is the opportunity.

[Ducky]

Bill, not being a professional, not even close, my opinion is of limited value.
A quick read shows a physical resemblance to the G10 but is said to be two stops faster and has a swivel LCD. That makes it interesting anyway. Priced close to the G10 they should be a bargain. I wonder it the G10s will go up in price the way the G9s did?

The S90 seems small and I can't see it as a primary camera for a pro or even a keen amateur. Nice specs though. At $450.00 it seems a bit out of the picture.

You asked the question, Bill, I wonder what your answer is today and again in two months?

[photogdave]

If they had put the lens and control ring of the S90 on the G11 it might be tempting. Even with the supposedly improved sensor of the G11 the lens is still too slow.
If I was still a working PJ I'm sure I would have some sort of compact in my bag. I always carried an Olympus Stylus Epic in the film days. Sometimes all the extra DOF of the small sensors can come in handy.

[Frankie]

Are the just introduced Canon G11 and S90 competition to the Leica M8 in terms of a small, carry-with-me compact for street photography, e.t.c.?

We won't really know for a few months, and, even then, there will be disagreement. But, knowing I use Leicas, folks have looked at prints on 13x19 paper from earlier cameras with small sensors and said, "Boy, that Leica makes sharp shots."

The M8 doesn't do that well at high ISO's. Between the designs possible with the short focal length lenses, less noisy sensors and computer correction of digital images, the mini cams are getting better. It's going to be an interesting race.

Already, some photojournalists are turning to the little digital minicams the way they turned to the 35mm rangefinder - that is to say with hoots of derision from users of larger cameras like the Graphic and Rollei. Will the Bressons, Haas, Erwitts and Smiths of the near future be using small sensor digitals? Will YOU be using these cameras?

This is an important question, and I hope you will chime in with your thoughts.

Bill

My immediate thoughts were already posted here:
http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1119043#post1119043

The camera you have [B]is the camera you use...amateur or professional notwithstanding.

It is refreshing to hear people say "Boy, that Leica makes sharp shots."...by default, assuming Bill's prints are made from a Leica.:)

[Bike Tourist]

Will the Bressons, Haas, Erwitts and Smiths of the near future be using small sensor digitals?

Bill

Sadly, I don't think there will be any. The short attention span public is used to short cuts spanning fractions of a second and has not the patience to examine a good photograph. (I hope I'm wrong.)

As to the little cameras, I'm still looking for one that's bike-able to take with me on my bicycle. Not a problem, you say? There are many to choose from?

I forgot to mention . . . I want a viewfinder. Not some tunnel vision approximation, not an optional at extra cost, expensive little number to fit in the flash shoe. To get it I would gladly give up the rear screen, zoom lens, pop-up flash, and 9 out of 10 features that exist solely because they can.

Meanwhile I'll struggle along with my D700, a very good camera but not at all bike friendly!

[johnastovall]

Are the just introduced Canon G11 and S90 competition to the Leica M8 in terms of a small, carry-with-me compact for street photography, e.t.c.?

We won't really know for a few months, and, even then, there will be disagreement. But, knowing I use Leicas, folks have looked at prints on 13x19 paper from earlier cameras with small sensors and said, "Boy, that Leica makes sharp shots."

The M8 doesn't do that well at high ISO's. Between the designs possible with the short focal length lenses, less noisy sensors and computer correction of digital images, the mini cams are getting better. It's going to be an interesting race.

Already, some photojournalists are turning to the little digital minicams the way they turned to the 35mm rangefinder - that is to say with hoots of derision from users of larger cameras like the Graphic and Rollei. Will the Bressons, Haas, Erwitts and Smiths of the near future be using small sensor digitals? Will YOU be using these cameras?

This is an important question, and I hope you will chime in with your thoughts.

Bill

Smith would. Remember he embraced the half frame Pen F.

[JNewell]

No. I have and use an LX-3 and an M8. There is just no comparison in terms of the image quality. I doubt the S90 is going to improve on the LX-3 IQ very much, if at all. I have been looking at the S90 with a lot of interest, thinking of possibly replacing the LX-3. Other than the more generous zoom range (which is very slow at the tele end and may not provide the optical quality of the more limited range lens on the LX-3), I think I may stick with the LX-3 because its controls allow me easier/greater control over the camera than the S90 appears to offer.

FWIW, of course...

[Pablito]

This is an important question, and I hope you will chime in with your thoughts.

Bill

True, but it's a question each photographer must answer for himself or herself based on each indvidual's way of working, etc. These new cameras are in incremental improvement over earlier models, no new camera will be "THE ONE", these machines evolve, that is to be expected. These cameras - the LX3, the new Canons, will not have the image quality of a DSLR but it's up to each of us to decide how much of a compromise we're willing to make in order to carry as smaller device. But, to answer your question - yes, I use the LX3 because of the 24mm f2.0 lens and "good enough" image quality - based on my level of comfort. But it's no substitute for the DSLR, .

[Ken Ford]

I think the G11 will get quite a bit of attention from PJs, at least the few that are left.

I know one of my old co-workers that is still at the Trib is very interested - he does a lot of spec filler work with an old Oly 7070 and has felt the Canon G series wasn't enough of an improvement to switch before now. Like me, he won't consider a camera without an optical VF for "serious" work and likes having a compact body for times he wants to stay low profile. (The paper only supplies Canon DSLR equipment, anything else is on his dime so an M8 is out of budget.)

If they had only included an optical VF on the S90... sigh.

I know I'm going to be in the market for a G11 so long as the low light capabilities are improved.

[leicashot]

As a Leica M author I find it rather odd that you'd compare the Leica M to these cameras. Honestly it's kinda insulting to Leica to compare their products to a mass market, do everything camera due to it's size being similar. Other than that, they really have nothing in common.

As much as I love my Ricoh GR, I'd never compare it to my Leica M rangefinder even though I can use them for similatr purposes- they are totally different in 'THE WAY' they achieve their results. If we're going to continue such ridiculous comparisons about competition of amatuer compacts to Leica M, why not just stop producing rangefinders and get Leica to produce D-Lux's for the length of the company's remaining life?

..and as for Photojournalists being interested in this camera.....no way....not for work purposes. It's not a pro camera and the quality isn't up to standard yet. While many amatuers would think the quality is perfectly fine, many photo editors to agencies and publications would strongly dissagree.

Lastly, a rangefinder is a totally different way of working. We all know the key attributes of a rangefinder are accurate patch focusing through a large bright viewfinder thats not dependant on the lens and no blackout during exposure. Unless the cameras we compare to have those key attributes then we may as well compare the Leica M to any camera in a similar size and a digital sensor....where does this end?

If we can't distinguish the differences between a Leica M and Canon G's, then why are we on this forum?

[Ken Ford]

As a Leica M author I find it rather odd that you'd compare the Leica M to these cameras. Honestly it's kinda insulting to Leica to compare their products to a mass market, do everything camera due to it's size being similar. Other than that, they really have nothing in common.

Really? I see them as having the exact same purpose - a small candid camera. You're getting hung up on the execution, not the mission.

..and as for Photojournalists being interested in this camera.....no way....not for work purposes. It's not a pro camera and the quality isn't up to standard yet. While many amatuers would think the quality is perfectly fine, many photo editors to agencies and publications would strongly dissagree.

I'll mention that to my friend - they'll have to redact all the work he's shot with his 7070 from the archives at the Chicago Tribune. Good images don't care how they're created, only camera fetishists give a damn.

If we can't distinguish the differences between a Leica M and Canon G's, then why are we on this forum

Maybe because it's about the pictures? Don't get me wrong, I'm a Leica and Nikon fondler of the first degree - but in the end it all comes down to the images we make. If carrying and using a G11 allows me to create what I see, who cares?

[Quinn Porter]

It seems that everytime a new compact camera is introduced there is great excitement that this will be the "one". But again and again, we see that the improvements are incremental rather than revolutionary. I've no doubt that the new Canon offerings will be some of the best compact digitals ever made, but that's not saying much.

[MaxElmar]

Bill, as far as I can tell, the new Sony and Canon are nice improvements in the sensor area but they only bring performance up a bit - say about equal to a good 4/3 size sensor. But they're stuck with pretty slow lenses. It's a nice improvement, but for low-light performance they won't touch a large 24 x 36 sensor, especially with a fast lens. Of course - the sensor design improvements (if they really are improvements) will filter upwards to the larger sensors and the disparity will widen again!

That being said, I work with a lot of local journalists and they're using all sorts of cameras--still mostly SLRs, but some digital compacts as well. One factor is that since all journalism nowadays winds up on the web, video capability has suddenly become important for some of these folks. And most compacts will deliver adequate video for the web.

Let's not forget the sports guys will be using big-ol SLRs with giant, fast lenses, as they have pretty much since the beginning of time. (Big Bertha Graflex 4x5 SLR, anyone?)

Leicashot - you should chill out a bit. When my great-grandfather bought my Leica IIIa in 1937 it WAS a "mass market, do everything camera." Maybe the high end of the mass market, but mass market, none the less.

[JNewell]

Sometimes the improvements aren't even incrementally positive. I've owned at least half a dozen of the SD/Elph Powershots over the years and they've been very inconsistent in terms of performance. This isn't unique to Canon, but I don't think we can take for granted that optical and other performance will be better than, or even as good as,other current/recent Canon models. The proof of this pudding will be in the tasting, as always...

[leicashot]

Really? I see them as having the exact same purpose - a small candid camera. You're getting hung up on the execution, not the mission.

I'm sorry but as important as the mission is, we're here now talking about gear 'because' of the fact we care so much about the 'execution' or we wouldn't be here talking about this cr@p on a forum, right?


I'll mention that to my friend - they'll have to redact all the work he's shot with his 7070 from the archives at the Chicago Tribune. Good images don't care how they're created, only camera fetishists give a damn.

The Chicago tribune is a newspaper right? Their need for high quality files is not so imperative. There is no doubt that if your friend owned a Leica M8, the files would be of higher quality and better suited to Agencies who would reject the 7070 files, because there needs to be standards as they are image providers to their clients and need to draw the line somewhere. It's not as if we're talking about major dissasters where a camera phone picture will do....but don't get me wrong, the M8 is IMHO, NOT a professional camera...only that the sensor and lens quality combine to make fantasticly detailed files.

Maybe because it's about the pictures? Don't get me wrong, I'm a Leica and Nikon fondler of the first degree - but in the end it all comes down to the images we make. If carrying and using a G11 allows me to create what I see, who cares?

We can talk all day about the fact it doesn't matter how one shoots or what kit they're using, but we're here talking tech so it does matter, and people do 'care'. Now as much as you'll run around loving your G11, the minute the G12 is announced, you'll be eager to attain that, right? ...as you're already talking about owning a G11 now.



Quality aside there are many factors that determine 'how' a great image is aquired, but at the end of the day, it's our camera of choice that influences the results, as well as our behaviour.

How else can I say it? When I shot a Leica M, I can focus and compose through a viewfinder in any lighting condition and know I have the compostition I want, focus accurate and timing perfect on each frame.

With a Canon G camera, I need to hold the camera at arms length, unsteadily (relying on IS to compensate), focus and shoot. This can make a big difference to the way subjects react. Alternatively, I can mount an external viewfinder, look through it, and pray the focus is accurate, and if lighting changes, I need to take it way from my face and off my subject, look down , make the necessary changes and recompose again.....as this can be done with the Leica without taking the camera away from my face. This is how a PJ needs to operate in difficult situations, where a toy camera will only complicate the situation.

Again, it all comes down to how one wants to work, and what quality they expect from their files....the point is that the Leica M is NOT a camera to be compared to a toy camera just because they share a similar size.

[leicashot]

Leicashot - you should chill out a bit. When my great-grandfather bought my Leica IIIa in 1937 it WAS a "mass market, do everything camera." Maybe the high end of the mass market, but mass market, none the less.

My point has nothing to do with 'mass market' but more to do with style of camera and execution methods. The Leica M is just as different to a G11 as it is to an SLR. Size is the only thing they have in common, and not justification for legitimate comparison, IMHO of course :bang: ....though I guess when I type I don't come across so humble :) love this guys.....no offence ok :)

[easyrider]

Are the just introduced Canon G11 and S90 competition to the Leica M8 in terms of a small, carry-with-me compact for street photography, e.t.c.?

We won't really know for a few months, and, even then, there will be disagreement. But, knowing I use Leicas, folks have looked at prints on 13x19 paper from earlier cameras with small sensors and said, "Boy, that Leica makes sharp shots."

The M8 doesn't do that well at high ISO's. Between the designs possible with the short focal length lenses, less noisy sensors and computer correction of digital images, the mini cams are getting better. It's going to be an interesting race.

Already, some photojournalists are turning to the little digital minicams the way they turned to the 35mm rangefinder - that is to say with hoots of derision from users of larger cameras like the Graphic and Rollei. Will the Bressons, Haas, Erwitts and Smiths of the near future be using small sensor digitals? Will YOU be using these cameras?

This is an important question, and I hope you will chime in with your thoughts.

Bill

A friend of mine, Colin Perkel, who is a journalist just spent two months in Kandahar for the Canadian Press news agency. (Canadian version of AP). He took along two Canon G9s and came back with spectacular stuff -- about 500 pix and some video. His stuff was widely used in Canadian newspapers.

CanPress reporters have to write, shoot and do radio these days. They also cover the "ramp ceremonies" -- when bodies of soldiers are brought back -- for one of the TV networks. He used a small video cam mounted on a tripod for that but all his other stuff when he went out in the field with the troops was shot with the G9s. One of them developed dust problems -- the climate is very harsh -- so he was glad to have a backup. The DSLRs are just to big to carry when going out with the troops.

So, we are already "there." Journalists are using these small cameras.

[Ken Ford]

I'm sorry but as important as the mission is, we're here now talking about gear 'because' of the fact we care so much about the 'execution' or we wouldn't be here talking about this cr@p on a forum, right?

You may want to re-read Bill's original post - this is *all about* usage.

The Chicago tribune is a newspaper right? Their need for high quality files is not so imperative. There is no doubt that if your friend owned a Leica M8, the files would be of higher quality and better suited to Agencies who would reject the 7070 files, because there needs to be standards as they are image providers to their clients and need to draw the line somewhere. It's not as if we're talking about major dissasters where a camera phone picture will do....but don't get me wrong, the M8 is IMHO, NOT a professional camera...only that the sensor and lens quality combine to make fantasticly detailed files.

I wasn't aware the question was about stock. Pick the right tool for the job.

We can talk all day about the fact it doesn't matter how one shoots or what kit they're using, but we're here talking tech so it does matter, and people do 'care'. Now as much as you'll run around loving your G11, the minute the G12 is announced, you'll be eager to attain that, right? ...as you're already talking about owning a G11 now.

Who are you to assume what I do or don't do? I still shoot my D1 and my Oly 4040, so I must be one of those tech jumpers you so obviously despise. Yeah, right.

Quality aside there are many factors that determine 'how' a great image is aquired, but at the end of the day, it's our camera of choice that influences the results, as well as our behaviour.

How else can I say it? When I shot a Leica M, I can focus and compose through a viewfinder in any lighting condition and know I have the compostition I want, focus accurate and timing perfect on each frame.

With a Canon G camera, I need to hold the camera at arms length, unsteadily (relying on IS to compensate), focus and shoot. This can make a big difference to the way subjects react. Alternatively, I can mount an external viewfinder, look through it, and pray the focus is accurate, and if lighting changes, I need to take it way from my face and off my subject, look down , make the necessary changes and recompose again.....as this can be done with the Leica without taking the camera away from my face. This is how a PJ needs to operate in difficult situations, where a toy camera will only complicate the situation.

Again, it all comes down to how one wants to work, and what quality they expect from their files....the point is that the Leica M is NOT a camera to be compared to a toy camera just because they share a similar size.

How do you justify owning a GRDIII, oh great Leica purist? It would seem to be beneath you. Besides - you are aware the G11 has an optical VF, correct? Not a good one, but suitable for most use. That's the only reason I'd even consider one.

There is absolutely no reason a camera like a G11 can't replace a traditional RF for journalistic use.

[bwcolor]

My needs as a photographer have changed over the years. I no longer sell my services. I use to rely upon flash in low light and have many modern and ancient strobes to show for my disease. I've a number of SLRs but primarily shoot with a 1DMKIII and the really fast "L" glass primes, but find that I rarely have this camera with me when I see my potential subject and it isn't state of the art high ISO anyways.

Small quality high ISO images will get me into a small form factor. I want to be able to easily carry my camera and I don't care what company makes the camera.

Lastly, the Japanese have the technology these days. The days of German camera supremacy are long gone. Canon has earned my trust, while Leica has demonstrated high prices and technology that, as of recent, been less than stellar. We will see what the future brings.

If it makes the image, is reliable with good ergonomics.. I'll use it.. please..

[Fedia]

For the web presentation technical image quality from small sensor compact digital cameras is good enough, but for large gallery prints... maybe, but only if it was shot up to iso 200 and below. Good looking pictures from lumix lx3 at iso 400 on the web, when printed large look quite bad - strong noise reduction, lack of fine detail... Photojournalists quite often have to shoot at iso 800, 1600... I work on my long term projects, I spend most of my time for that, this is my life, and I want my life work to be suitable for large gallery prints. While technical image quality in photography is usually a secondary thing, very often that same technical quality helps and adds to the image a lot... All my wealth is and probably will be my archive and (as of 2009) I don't see any reason for shooting with small sensor compact cameras. My nikon d200 with prime or small kit lens and a leica style shoulder strap looks compact enough, and I carry my kit in a non photographic bag. By the way, for example: Pentax dslr k-m/2000 with kit lens is very compact, cheap and light, but technically it would outperform any the best compact camera on the market including g11... Small sensor compact cameras are good and fun to shoot with... but for seriously working photographer... no, I don't think there is a necessity for this. Entry or prosumer grade dslr's aren't that big, I would say when properly used they look the size of leica rf.

[emraphoto]

performance is always trumped by subject matter. i have images that could not have been taken with a dlsr. no way, no how.

digital compacts (or film for that matter) have their place in this photojournalists bag.

[emraphoto]

"..and as for Photojournalists being interested in this camera.....no way....not for work purposes. It's not a pro camera and the quality isn't up to standard yet. While many amatuers would think the quality is perfectly fine, many photo editors to agencies and publications would strongly dissagree."

i am presuming you are NOT a photojournalist?

[kshapero]

Even though I am Jewish, I enter into the confessional box. The Priest asks me to confess my sins. I wiggle in the seat. Finally I blurt out," I have sinned, I usually have my Ricoh GX200 with me and sometimes it is the rig the gets the "shot"". Please, please forgive me for I am confused. The Earth is moving quickly under my feet. I am lusting for the S90 with the "ring". I am weak.

[leicashot]

"..and as for Photojournalists being interested in this camera.....no way....not for work purposes. It's not a pro camera and the quality isn't up to standard yet. While many amatuers would think the quality is perfectly fine, many photo editors to agencies and publications would strongly dissagree."

i am presuming you are NOT a photojournalist?

You presume wrong

[leicashot]

You may want to re-read Bill's original post - this is *all about* usage.
Well, you made it that way by talking about 'execution'. Besides it's is all about usage!


I wasn't aware the question was about stock. Pick the right tool for the job.

I'm not talking about stock. I am talking about important PJ assignment work beyond the needs of just newspapers, where quality isn't a major factor.

Who are you to assume what I do or don't do? I still shoot my D1 and my Oly 4040, so I must be one of those tech jumpers you so obviously despise. Yeah, right.

"If carrying and using a G11 allows me to create what I see, who cares?"

Remember saying this? Wow, seems like you're taking this personaly and you really shouldn't. I'm not attcking you, just disagreeing with your comments, as you are mine.

How do you justify owning a GRDIII, oh great Leica purist? It would seem to be beneath you. Besides - you are aware the G11 has an optical VF, correct? Not a good one, but suitable for most use. That's the only reason I'd even consider one.

I am by no means a Leica purist, but I am experienced at using rangefinders and understand the differences in application. No camera, nor person is beneath me, thank you. BTW, I've owned a G10, and would never class it in the same category as a rangefinder.

There is absolutely no reason a camera like a G11 can't replace a traditional RF for journalistic use.

For amatuers that still life, landscapes and basic portraits, the G11 could easily replace the M, but at a reduced quality and different photographic method. It is the method alone which I enjoy most about using a rangefinder. The methods are different using a G11 and that's my point. Plus one is designed to work with fast interchangeable primes lenses and one isn't.




Most people that say a G series camera can do whatever/however a M series camera can, don't actually own a Leica M, nor have they extensively used one to know the advantages/disadvantages and differences of using such a camera. This is not being snobbish, just a matter of my perception from reading forums such as this.

I don't expect my GR to do what my Leica can (and vice versa), especially in the way it does it so I don't compare them. One compliments the other for different purposes, and I'm not confused about that. Neither do I expect everyone to understand what I'm talking about seeing not everyone owns/has used a rangefinder.

I've said enough. I don't feel like continuing this useless argument, especially one where no one wins. But it has been somewhat interesting. I haven't taken anything personaly and I hope you haven't either. Good arguments make people think as long as it doesn't get (too) ugly.

Cheers, Kris

[Ken Ford]

I've said enough. I don't feel like continuing this useless argument, especially one where no one wins. But it has been somewhat interesting. I haven't taken anything personaly and I hope you haven't either. Good arguments make people think as long as it doesn't get ugly.

Cheers, Kris

I don't know what to say given your behavior in this thread. Good bye.

[leicashot]

I don't know what to say given your behavior in this thread. Good bye.

My behaviour? I know I speak in an abrupt manner, but you're no angel either, so may I suggest you take a look in the mirror pal. Neither of us have been angels here :bang::angel:

[emraphoto]

You presume wrong

a photojournalist that fills stock image banks? yes, you need to meet the parameters of said stock image bank.

i know wire service, press and assignment shooters that use point and shoots. i use a point and shoot on occasion. to say that photojournalists don't/won't use them is plain wrong.

[leicashot]

a photojournalist that fills stock image banks? yes, you need to meet the parameters of said stock image bank.

i know wire service, press and assignment shooters that use point and shoots. I use a point and shoot on occasion. To say that photojournalists don't/won't use them is plain wrong.

Yes, they use them, I am one and use one, but for most of my clients, they expect high resolution files, especially when light gets low. I'm not saying these cameras aren't capable, but their sensors are still not up to professional standards and not everyone will accept such files.

Sorry but if you know press/wire assignement photographers going outand using point and shoots as their main professional cameras, they aren't too professional sounding to me. There may be situations where looking like a 'pro' can hinder one's results or even entry into certain places, but for the most part PJ's on assignment need to be taken seriously and shooting with a small camera can also have the opposite effect, depending on the situation of course.

Professionals that I know have standards, standards that meet their clients standards, and that's why they are called 'professionals'. If they 'need' to use a compact to gain certain access into a an event where larger SLRs or press aren't permitted then I understand, but for the most part they aren't designed to withdtand professional use and are not dependable cameras. More than anything, too much can go wrong with electronic controlled zoom designs. Not weather proofing of electronics, etc. Which is the reason I also don't classify the M8 as a 'pro' camera.

Like I said, I shoot a GR which in good light could pass as professional images on certain assignments but for most of my work, it's file quality (like all other compacts) just won't cut it. Can't say I've seen too many G series in the hands of pros on assignment, ever.....but I am optimistic they will become more common when the sensors are improved, heck, I'll get in line. But for now, sorry but they don't cut it, and the M8 at ISO 640 and under does, IMHO. Nuff said.

Cheers, Kris

[emraphoto]

"Sorry but if you know press/wire assignement photographers going outand using point and shoots as their main professional cameras, they aren't too professional sounding to me. There may be situations where looking like a 'pro' can hinder one's results or even entry into certain places, but for the most part PJ's on assignment need to be taken seriously and shooting with a small camera can also have the opposite effect, depending on the situation of course."

i didn't say they used them as their "main" camera. i just said they use them. it's not about how people perceive your "seriousness", it's about getting photo's that could get your arrested (or worse) in a country you DON'T want to be arrested (or worse) in.

[leicashot]

"Sorry but if you know press/wire assignement photographers going outand using point and shoots as their main professional cameras, they aren't too professional sounding to me. There may be situations where looking like a 'pro' can hinder one's results or even entry into certain places, but for the most part PJ's on assignment need to be taken seriously and shooting with a small camera can also have the opposite effect, depending on the situation of course."

i didn't say they used them as their "main" camera. i just said they use them. it's not about how people perceive your "seriousness", it's about getting photo's that could get your arrested (or worse) in a country you DON'T want to be arrested (or worse) in.

That's a good point but I think if you're a foreigner in one of 'those' countries, you're already gonna stick out somewhat, so the camera really isn't going to make a big difference as they're not quite used to seeing tourists running around I suspect....but the 'best' photographers will use whatever it takes to get the job done...and relating back to the topic, the G series is not a camera to compare to a Leica rangefinder, like the M8. Sure they can be used for similar things, but so can small SLR's, so where is that comparison, and were does it end? EP-1, DP2, E-420? Most of these cameras can do whay more than a Leica M, but a skilled M photographer uses an M for the rangefinder attributes which cannot be substituted by compacts or SLRs. If you think they can, then why are we all on this website?

Camera's are so veratile now that they can be easily substituted if the photographer is capabale of operating the substitute equipment successfully in a similar way. A rangefinder is totally different in operation to a compact, more so than an SLR which is why I don't believe in the comparison made here.

I couldn't possibly have anything more useful to say so I'll end it here, but some great arguments either way, regardless of the 'hostility' :D Lets just enjoy whatever we shoot with, with whatever our opinion is.

Cheers

Kris

[easyrider]

First of all, let us not fight. It's only an Internet forum, eh?

The idea that using one of the Canon G's makes you somehow "non-professional" is a bit off.

The discussion is about photojournalism, not fashion photography. Journalists will use whatever tool fits to tell the story. And, I suggest the quality does not suffer.

My buddy who went to Afghanistan did NOT want a DSLR because it was too unhandy when going out with the troops. These guys wear 50 lbs of body armour in 50 degree heat, have to climb in and out of vehicles and frequently run for cover.

I bet the same arguments were being made when photojournalists started using Leicas and Contaxes instead of Speed Graphics.

In the end, it's the results that count.

The world is changing. Newspapers now run video on their web pages and the G9, G10 or G11 can deliver that.

[charlesfoto]

On another site, I've been following what is probably the most important issue for photojournalists with the G11 or any compact digicam ... shutter lag. I know that there is a least one PJ who shoots with a few Olympus compacts, but if any camera can't respond when you need it to, I wouldn't be interested.

[tom.w.bn]

I don't know if it was already posted, but it fits to the discussion about pros using PS cameras.

http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=2726&fromTips=1 (strange flash navigation here)

By clicking "Tips & Advice" you can watch three testimonial videos where protographers of the VII Agency talk about using the G10.

I would like to know, how they dealt with the shutter lag of the G10. Even in manual focus you have a considerable shutter lag.

[Florian1234]

I had been in short contact with Stephen Mayes from VII agency about their photographers using the G10. While he did not tell about the technical side, he stated that they use it mostly for in between official assignments (where they mostly use DSLRs) but there had been some assignments where they used it and also published photos from a G10 PJ (he did not state which ones).

Still interesting though. It seems that Gary Knight also used it during the workshops he run in 2008 and 2009 so far (there's a participient's video on the net somewhere).

[Darkhorse]

I got a dinky little Selphy printer this weekend and finally made some prints from some older photos that I made with an Elph while on a fishing trip last year. You know, despite it being a lowly little point and shoot, many of the prints were quite lovely.

I'm going on my honeymoon to Italy next year and I've been thinking of what camera setup I should take. I thought I'd take my OM system with a few lenses and my Autocord. But I'm finding that using the OM alone can be a pain while trying to just enjoy a weekend in the area. "Hold on, Honey. I've gotta change a lens." etc.

Having something like the s90 could take off some photographic pressure. I remember it was a fun little camera to use in a pinch on the fishing trip. I would, of course, take the Autocord. That's a no brainer.

[tom.w.bn]

Shutter lag (or more precisely in most cases, AF lag) is only something that bothers posters on the internet, in the real world it is about the last thing anyone actually worries about.

Hm. Why? There are definitely some situations that are gone when you have a shutter lag of 1/2sec. For example a smile on a face or a nice scene of my daughter while playing outside.

[easyrider]

Hm. Why? There are definitely some situations that are gone when you have a shutter lag of 1/2sec. For example a smile on a face or a nice scene of my daughter while playing outside.

I occasionally use the now ancient Canon G2. You deal with shutter lag by depressing the shutter half-way. The camera focuses and after that the lag is negligible. It is not more difficult than shooting action sports with a film camera.

[Bill Pierce]

Michael Reichmann at the Luminous Landscape conducted an interesting survey comparing G10 images to that of a medium format digital.

Here’s a brief quote from that piece.

“In every case no one could reliably tell the difference between 13X19" prints shot with the $40,000 Hasselblad and Phase One 39 Megapixel back, and the new $500 Canon G10. In the end no one got more than 60% right, and overall the split was about 50 / 50, with no clear differentiator. In other words, no better than chance.”

Here is the piece in its entirety

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml

It should be noted his pictures were taken using a monopod and the low, native ISO of 80.

I conducted a set of comparisons (except I used a tripod or high shutter speeds instead of a monopod) with the G10, the M8 and some DSLR’s just for my own edification. Same results, professional photographers and regular humans couldn’t really distinguish between 13x19 prints from the G10 and the other cameras.

This type of shooting (camera support, low ISO) doesn’t apply to photojournalism. We fortunately have lower standards even when we have to make big prints for exhibitions. It does, however, apply to M8 shooting.

The M8, in many ways, follows the pattern set up by medium format digitals - no anti Moire filter, slow processing, great files at the native ISO and not very good files at high speeds. This must disappoint people who used a film Leica with pushed HP5 or P3200 and Tom’s base winds. On the other hand, it certainly makes up for Kodachrome being discontinued.

Unfortunately, fortunately? - so does a camera like the G10 and a tripod.

[emraphoto]

Shutter lag (or more precisely in most cases, AF lag) is only something that bothers posters on the internet, in the real world it is about the last thing anyone actually worries about.

actually it drove me batty out in the real world. sold the little bugger as soon as i got home.

[Quinn Porter]

I occasionally use the now ancient Canon G2. You deal with shutter lag by depressing the shutter half-way. The camera focuses and after that the lag is negligible. It is not more difficult than shooting action sports with a film camera.

I haven't used the G2 or the G10, but the G7 and G9 had meaningful lag after the half press. For this reason, there are better compacts for shooting candids.

[leicashot]

Today on a side project, which will be published, my Leica M8 battery died. I used my GR III as a backup because my DLSR is too big and not suitable for this particular project.

Now while I was happy with the results on the GR, it was being used at ISO 64 in bright light, but it would (just like any G series) suffer if the light dropped to levels where ISO 400+ is required.

So while my GR did the job, I still wouldn't compare it to a Leica M just because it can do the same job. I wonder what the PJ's did when the light dropped in Afghanistan....use flash?

I know plenty of PJ's capanble of carrying equipment more suitable to the job in areas like Afghanistan. Sure some may feel that it's better cause it's lighter, but it cannot substitute a large sensor DSLR, especially for low light.

[Harry Lime]

I think the only viable compact out there is the Ricoh GRD series (GRD III), simply because it is the only one of the bunch that has the ergonomics and feature set of a serious photographic tool. To be specific it is the only camera of the group that has extensive controls for scale focusing, which is the make or break feature in my book.

Take the LX3 / Dlux-4 for instance. Great image quality, great lens, compact size.

But you can't set the zoom to a specific focal length (24,28,35,50,60mm),
which makes it impossible to use external viewfinders, except at the widest and longest range of the zoom.

The zoom rocker is quite sensitive, making it difficult to adjust framing.

Also the camera shuts itself off after a set period of time, thus resetting where you had set the zoom.

The screen has a certain amount of lag, so it is no good for decisive moment shots. That's why these cameras need a bright-line finders or good optical viewfinder. Of course you can't see what the AF is aiming at with the brightline finder, which brings us to the next point.

Prefocusing at a specific distance is very limited. After 2 meters the focus indicator jumps to infinity. This makes scale focusing very difficult or impossible, limiting the usefulness of the camera, when it comes to making action shots.

The aperture / shutter speed controls are handled by a single, tiny joystick. It works well if you are not in a hurry, but otherwise forget it.

I spent about a week with the LX3 and it's the best digital P&S I've ever used, if all you wanted to do was take pictures of static subjects, the family standing in front of landmarks on vacation etc.

Yes, people have made some great street shots with this camera, but it is a little something of a crap shoot. You never feel like you have instant control and a certain amount of luck is needed to make anything but a static shot.

I have similar feelings about the G10.

Again, the scale focusing options are limited. I don't think you can set the zoom to a specific focal length. At least it has an optical viewfinder, but it's coverage is 77%, which makes it difficult to accurately compose a shot. Like all LCD screens and EVF there is a certain amount of lag, making it difficult to make shots, where split second timing is vital.

The Sigma DP2 also seems to get the scale focusing part right, but by most accounts it is quite quirky in many other areas. I've heard nothing but bad things about the AF system and apparently the screen is mediocre at best. The GUI is improved from the DP1, but still something of a mess.


The Oly EP-1 has many of the same problems as the other cameras. Again the scale focusing setup is not as good as that of the Ricoh and the LCD display is sluggish.


The Ricoh GR-D series (now in it's 3rd incarnation) on the other hand was designed for serious photographers.

For starters it has extensive options for scale focusing, including a very clever DOF display. Very nicely done.

Because it uses a fast prime lens you only need one bright-line finder. Obviously you still don't get the AF indicator with the bright-line finder, but the scale focusing modes are so sophisticated that with the extra DOF of the reduced size sensor it's a totally useable setup.

Aperture and shutter speed are on dials, like a DSLR.

The list goes on and on. I highly recommend downloading the manual for the GRD III and examining it's feature set.

The biggest problem with the GRD III is price and sensor size.

With the optical viewfinder you're looking at a lot of money (close to $1000?) for a small sensor camera. That's a lot of cash. You can get a low end DSLR or M4/3 for that money.

Above 400 asa it falls behind M4/3 and any upcoming APS-C camera in this category.

Ricoh also dropped the teleconverter (28mm -> 40mm), but it may resurface.


Scale focusing really is the Achilles heel of almost all of these cameras.

Think of the old LTM bodies. These were very basic cameras and in many ways similar to these digital compacts. Leica got a specific set of features right that made them viable tools for a certain type of shooting.

- Full control over scale focusing in light of the absence of a combined RF or mirror box etc.
- Good brightline viewfinders for realtime, reasonably accurate framing.
- Fast access to shutter and aperture controls
- Crisp shutter release

The EVF or LCD has too much lag for work where timing is critical, but to compensate for that you need to use an external finder. But if you don't have extensive control over scale focusing you are out of luck, because you can't use the AF with the external finder.

I hope Panasonic figured this out with the upcoming GF1 and Oly with their more advanced M4/3 model. They really need to take a look at just how right Ricoh got the interface and feature set on their GRD series.

Ultimately what we need is a digital Leica CL. Or a cheaper Leica M8... Compact cameras with real viewfinders. EVF and LCD is not going to cut it. The shutter release on many of these cameras is quite crisp, but that's a mute point if the LCD display has a 1/8th of a second or worse lag time. I would love a M4/3 camera with the spinning mirror viewfinder from the analog PEN.

But don't hold your breath. According to the fanboys optical viewfinders are for geezers and therefore we're going to be stuck with sluggish LCD and EVF finders for a long time. As is often the case in the age of digital photography, the serious shooters are at the mercy of the hordes of amateurs and weekend warriors.

[charjohncarter]

Very, very good, Harry; I like especially the comment about a 'crap shoot' that is what we used to call in the USA 'fire hose photography' when the frame per second wars started (and have not finished).

You also say: "But don't hold your breath. According to the fanboys optical viewfinders are for geezers and therefore we're going to be stuck with sluggish LCD and EVF finders for a long time. As is often the case in the age of digital photography, the serious shooters are at the mercy of the hordes of amateurs and weekend warriors."

I general, I totally agree, but not completely (maybe it isn't your opinion, but a fanboy's); as I am a geezer. No offense, there are always exceptions to the rules (I hope that I am one of them).

[amateriat]

Shutter lag (or more precisely in most cases, AF lag) is only something that bothers posters on the internet, in the real world it is about the last thing anyone actually worries about.
Well, yeah and no: out in the field, shooters don't go on like crazy about it, of course, but it has impact, and it becomes a matter of just how much one wishes to work around it.

I recently did two shooting gigs for a political candidate. Both shoots were totally digital–rare for me–and my weapon of choice was an Olympus C-8080. AF/shutter-lag was relatively small, but it was there, and certainly got in the way of at least a few shots I was setting up. Yes, I can work around this somewhat, but why in Hades should I? For that matter, why, this late in the day, should I have to put up with mediocre optical finders (such as in the entire Canon G series thus far...I'd like to think they fixed that in the 11, but seriously doubt it). The Olympus has an EVF for accurate framing, at least, but I still wish I had a decent OVF.

As far as whether pocket digitals can do the job in PJ land? That territory is largely a computer monitor now, as opposed to the printed page, but in either case, particularly if we're talking newsprint, even the 2mp dSLRs of yore were practically overkill. I sometimes wonder how long there will be a market for most of the high-end digital gear so many of us fetishize, replaced by the frame-grab from some multi-purpose device (fifth-generation iPhone, anyone?). Doesn't thrill me in the least, but that's what I feel I'm staring down the barrel of.


- Barrett

[Fraser]

As a press photographer working in the UK I use canon dslrs for work but do have a canon g9 when I'm not at work, I think its ok and I feel I would not benefit in spending more money on an M8 which would be used for the same purpose. I have yet to meet a full time professional newpaper/press photographer who uses an M8 but I know a lot of photographers who keep there little G9, G10 etc in the bottom of there bags!

[newspaperguy]

Kris (Leicashot) wrote, "...This is how a PJ needs to operate in difficult situations, where a toy camera will only complicate the situation."

I really think you need to get out more. Way back in the dark ages (1999/2002) before I retired from the Washington DC daily scene, I can remember the photog from one of the slick-paper trade mags shooting the White House press conferences with a Nikon 990. Got stunning results in print (and a lot of dirty looks from the rest of us), so professional use of P&S digis in no new thing.

Anyway, just a thought from another guy whose sole earnings came from the results of his cameras. Oh yeah, I still use a Canon G5 & an Oly C-3030, when a DSLR is the wrong camera... or not the one at hand.

[newspaperguy]

http://www.millennics.com/olympus/tope/tope38/pictures/tope38_9.jpg

[newspaperguy]

Sorry... lost the caption: When a P&S in hand is worth a dozen DSLRs,
or even (gasp) a good RF.

[Jason808]

Will the Bressons, Haas, Erwitts and Smiths of the near future be using small sensor digitals?


No, they'll be using small HD (and higher-res) video cameras. Think future developments of the RED Scarlet form-factor. I'm not sure the video-capable DSLR will be the instant go-to choice.

[Harry Lime]

Sorry... lost the caption: When a P&S in hand is worth a dozen DSLRs,
or even (gasp) a good RF.

I think you're right. I shoot documentary projects and street photography and there have been many times when I'm working in a not so good area that I wish I had relatively cheap and compact camera that produced acceptable results.

The D700 is just too flashy and while my film M bodies look like antiques, they are very expensive to replace if I got in trouble. They also draw attention. If I had a good M4/3 camera that I could stick in my pocket I would be in heaven.

The key phrase here is "acceptable quality". A 4/3rds body is never going to produce images like a D700, but they are of acceptable quality.

Remember when just recently that airline pilot made a perfect water landing in New York (I think?)?

One of the most published picture I saw was a shot someone made with their iPhone. No one cared that it was soft and odd looking. It was a good shot that showed the event.

For news and documentary work getting a good shot is the priority. Technical perfection is the icing on the cake.

[BillBingham2]

.....Way back in the dark ages (1999/2002) before I retired from the Washington DC daily scene, I can remember the photog from one of the slick-paper trade mags shooting the White House press conferences with a Nikon 990. Got stunning results in print (and a lot of dirty looks from the rest of us), so professional use of P&S digis in no new thing........

Go back a bit further. Lots of photographers in NYC carried around the early 135 P&S cameras for quick breaking stuff that they were too close to use the lens they had mounted on thier F3s. Now that was in early/mid 1980s so P&S in professional hands have been around for many years.

The stuff about not being of a high enough quality is bunk, it's a question of demand for the shot. If all you have of an event is an old Super 8mm frame or two and it's important enough (read people want to use it and buy it) they will take it. Would it be better had it been on a full frame 4x5 kodachrome yes, but if you have the only shot and someone wants it, the houses will take it.

B2 (;->

[easyrider]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tv5OW1oiVVc&feature=email

My buddy Colin Perkel, to whom i referred earlier, put together a personal video shot with a Canon G9.

He had two of them along during his two-month Afghanistan assignment.

[Ducky]

Fantastic footage. Do they still call it footage?
The G9 provided great images and that piece it a testimony to the camera.

[mawz]

Scale focusing on the m43 cameras is not an issue if you're willing to give up AF. The problem is that you can only have one option in a compact system. You either use M or LTM lenses and get easy scale focusing (the DoF markings are just about perfect for m43) or you use an AF lens and have to rely on AF or manual focusing via the EVF/LCD.

I shoot a fair bit of scale focused work with the G1.

[Chuck Albertson]

Well, the picture I've seen of the S90 doesn't appear to have a hot-shoe on the top, which nixes the use of an external rangefinder. Bill posted some advice on setting up a G9/G10 for use as a street camera, and Gary Knight has a YouTube clip floating around on the same subject. Use an external viewfinder, don't worry about the electronic one. If I could bury my other misgivings about digital imaging, I might give the G10/G11 a go that way. But if I did that, I might just as well go whole hog and get the M8.

[Ranchu]

I have similar feelings about the G10.

Again, the scale focusing options are limited. I don't think you can set the zoom to a specific focal length. At least it has an optical viewfinder, but it's coverage is 77%, which makes it difficult to accurately compose a shot. Like all LCD screens and EVF there is a certain amount of lag, making it difficult to make shots, where split second timing is vital.

Just wanted to note, there are two positions for custom settings on the mode dial of the G10, C1 and C2, they will save zoom positions, as well as all the settings in the menu, and will resume on startup. Very handy for use with external finders. Manual focus on the G10 doesn't work with the display off (I mean doesn't work, not just that you can't see it). It does default to 10 ft when you turn it on. Not very useful...

Personally, I've never had any trouble with shutter lag, it seems very responsive, but people are different in their needs, I guess.

[Leigh Youdale]

I've been facing a similar dilemma to many on this thread. I've tripped over the need for the convenience of a digital camera for some situations. I have yet to buy my first "serious" digital (as opposed to a 6MP Canon Ixus I carried for work). I too looked at the LX3 (no viewfinder), then the G10/11 (no decent viewfinder), the Olympus E-P1 (no viewfinder) and after toying with the idea of of a Nikon D300s (now why did I give up using my Nikon SLR kit, I wonder?) I'm pretty much decided on the Panasonic GF-1 (with optional viewfinder). M43 sensor, a couple of neat lenses and I find that with an adaptor I can fit any of my six M-mount CV and Leica lenses and if I want to get really serious all seven of my old Nikkor SLR prime lenses can be fitted with another adaptor.
Not quite pocketable, and it's not full frame, which would have been nice but it's pretty well featured and still bearing some resemblance to an RF and without the bulk and weight of a DSLR.

[Harry Lime]

I've been looking at the S90 recently and noticed the lack of a flash shoe.
For a moment I thought about adding one with some epoxy glue, so I could use an OVF.
Then I noticed that Canon put the power switch where the hotshoe would go.
Bast**ds. ;-)

[john_s]

I've been looking at the S90 recently and noticed the lack of a flash shoe.
For a moment I thought about adding one with some epoxy glue, so I could use an OVF.
Then I noticed that Canon put the power switch where the hotshoe would go.
Bast**ds. ;-)

I think they offer an external flash for it. I don't know how it works.

[Gary Sandhu]

It's small, yes-- but only the M offers interchangeable lenses, fast manual focussing, easy controls, and for the film M, durability and battery independence. The film M was never challenged by the film contax T series, the stylus, etc etc : photogs still used the M and the same will happen with digital. Even less of a competition now, given the huge sensor size differences.

[Harry Lime]

Scale focusing on the m43 cameras is not an issue if you're willing to give up AF. The problem is that you can only have one option in a compact system. You either use M or LTM lenses and get easy scale focusing (the DoF markings are just about perfect for m43) or you use an AF lens and have to rely on AF or manual focusing via the EVF/LCD.

I shoot a fair bit of scale focused work with the G1.

Sure, you can scale focus the M43 bodies, if you mount a manual focus lens via an adapter (Leica M etc), but out of the box and with the native lenses there is no functionality for this. You can't preset focus to let's say 2.5 meters, like you can with a GRD, Leica X1 or even the s90...

I'm really frustrated by the fact that pretty much all manufacturers have completely abandoned scale / zone focusing, in favor of AF. Can't we just have both?

[Harry Lime]

Bill -

Now, that a few weeks / months have passed, how is that S90 working out for you?

How is the shutter lag (if you preset focus)?
Any quirks worth mentioning that you have discovered?

I need a very small camera that will essentially fit in a shirt pocket and I'm looking at the S90. I would get a GRD III, but the 28mm is just too wide for me. At least I can set the S90 to 35 or 50mm...

thanks

[Bill Pierce]

Both the G10 and the S90 are working out. They are pretty much the cameras which are with me on the street.

Lag isn't that bad when you prefocus. With a little anticipation, moving subjects are pretty much where I want them in the finished picture. But, remember, the easiest, quickest way to prefocus is to find something at the correct distance, lit the same, and hold the button halfway down. This isn't always possible.

That said, I've used a variety of small cameras on the street and these have been the best for me. That's just my take. There are plenty of people who will disagree with me and have another favorite.

I think eventually there will be something with a C sensor that's an adequate street camera. I think we're headed in that direction. That would certainly please me. But for now, these two cameras are producing excellent images as long as I can use low ISO's.

[Harry Lime]

Thanks, Bill. I think I'm going to go for the S90, because it really will fit in a shirt pocket. I played around with it in the store and came away impressed. I'm reading the manual right now to get a better idea of what it offers.

A friend of a friend may have one I can borrow for a few days to give it a closer look, but so far it's the front runner.

thanks again.

[john_s]

There are a series of articles about the S90 here:

http://enticingthelight.com/2009/11/09/review-canon-s90-part-1-first-impressions/

In part 2 there are some tips about manual focus and presetting a preferred manual focus distance in the C (custom) setting. This has made my use of the s90 much more enjoyable.

[Bill Pierce]

There are a series of articles about the S90 here:

http://enticingthelight.com/2009/11/09/review-canon-s90-part-1-first-impressions/

In part 2 there are some tips about manual focus and presetting a preferred manual focus distance in the C (custom) setting. This has made my use of the s90 much more enjoyable.

John - Many, many thanks. This is an excellent reference.

[victoriapio]

Back to Bill's original question..
I think this thread has raised two interesting points:

1. Working photojournalists (newspaper/wire services) not only have used PSs but will continue to do so given the size, improving image quality relative to the needs of their employer, improving handling, and improving video quality. As a point of support, in April 2009 I attended the 30-year class anniversary of my Photojournalism Class at the University of Texas. Three classmates and staffers at the Austin American Statesman (Larry Kolvard, Jay Godwin and Becky Scoggins) had Canon G9s slung over their shoulders. Their working bags were in the car but the G9s were with them 24/7 according to Larry, and for pre-scheduled assignements they were a viable option in many cases, versus the DSLR. These guys/gals shoot everyday and must produce a useable image every time they are given an assignment. They are willing to work around a camera's faults to get an acceptable image and see the cameras as recording tools, a perfectly logical relationship IMO.

2. Just as interesting has been the reaction of non-professionals who find all sorts of features to criticize in PSs versus the Leica. The relationship between the camera and photographer is much different here. Cameras appear to be elevated to more than tools with this group. In some mysterious, emotional way the camera is an extension of the photographer's mind, almost to the point that if there is a break in the link between the photographer and the camera, suddenly photography is not possible. It is almost as if the photographic process is as important as the image itself. Fine, more power to them.

I appear to be following a path similar to Harry Lime's and probably many more photographers out there. I have made the transition from 1 to 2 and feel that the Leica M9/M8 is indeed my system of choice whenever possible. But the Leica system has faults and occasionally I miss having a DSLR in my hand. OR A WELL-DESIGNED POINT-N-SHOOT! Which is why I too am searching for the best PS I can find for those times when a rangefinder will not work. I am confident that at some point there will be a nice PS created that has all the features I am looking for, from wonderful prints at 24x30, to sharp lenses with character, to complete aperture control, blah blah blah. We are getting closer to it every day.

[Harry Lime]

>http://enticingthelight.com/2009/11/...t-impressions/

That's great, thanks.

[Harry Lime]

We are getting closer to it every day.

I hope.

So, far I think Ricoh got it mostly right with the GRD III, but the darn thing has a 28mm, which really isn't for everyone. It it was a 35 or 40 it would be golden.

The DP2s has the right lens, a big sensor, good scale focusing and a hot shoe for a viewfinder, but it's got a whole different set of issues. This is the one camera I want to test before I put money down for the S90. I can live with a lot of quirks as long as it will scale focus properly and has minimal shutter lag.

The G11 looks really good, but it's too big for what I want.

What is really frustrating is how even Leica of all companies doesn't seem to have been able to get it completely right with the X1 (besides it being far too expensive...)

All I really want is a CL-D. Stick a good APS-C sensor in it and call it a day. Why is that so hard?

[Jamie Pillers]

The Samsung NX10 and, hopefully, its mirrorless APS-C competitors will likely be as close to the CL-D/APS-C idea as we're going to get, IMO. I'm VERY much looking forward to seeing this idea take off.

Back in 2007, when I joined RFF, I said that there would be this type of camera in about 5 years. It looks like the small camera manufacturers are going to beat that by at least a year! :-) The EVF has really accelerated the development of these types of cameras.

[Harry Lime]

Apparently the EVF in the Samsung NX10 is still sluggish, which is a deal breaker.

EVF in general is a bust for action work, unless someone decides to crank up the frame rate to a point where it exceeds the reaction time of the human muscle system.

[Harry Lime]

Bill, is it true that you mounted a hot shoe to the tripod mount of the S90 and shoot the camera upside down with a brightline finder?

[Bill Pierce]

The DP2s has the right lens, a big sensor, good scale focusing and a hot shoe for a viewfinder, but it's got a whole different set of issues. This is the one camera I want to test before I put money down for the S90.

Harry -

I have a DP2. It's an interesting, infuriating camera with real limitations. It's capable of beautiful images - especially if you are, say, a landscape photographer fine tuning the low ISO image, checking the histogram and the preview and then refining the shot. I wouldn't recommend it for the street. There it will drive you nuts.


Here's a pretty intelligent review.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/sigma-dp2-review.html


Oh, and I'm still trying to figure out how to make really big prints from its raw files. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. I know this has a lot to do with Foveon sensor. But if anyone has really investigated this, I'd love to hear from them.

[Bill Pierce]

Bill, is it true that you mounted a hot shoe to the tripod mount of the S90 and shoot the camera upside down with a brightline finder?

Yes, and it's also true that people around me say, "Poor old man. He's obviously demented. He has no idea he is holding his camera upside down." This is actually much to be preferred over their saying, "Don't take my picture." and hitting me.

[Harry Lime]

Harry -

I have a DP2. ... I wouldn't recommend it for the street. There it will drive you nuts.

No store around here seems to carry this silly camera, so it's impossible to try it. Two weeks ago a Sigma rep was at a store with some demo bodies. But the battery was dead.

rats.

I've read some pretty brutal reviews about the camera and most seem to revolve around the slow AF, slow write speed, ridiculous menu system, lousy battery life, crappy LCD screen and noise above 800asa.

I keep telling myself that if I can simply scale focus the darn thing to 2.5 and 5 meters and pop off one shot at a time like I do with a Leica I'll be ok. The shutter release is supposed to be quite crisp, so that's good news. Put the viewfinder on top and I am in business. But I would like to get my hands on one before plunking down cash.


Here's a pretty intelligent review.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/sigma-dp2-review.html


Oh, and I'm still trying to figure out how to make really big prints from its raw files. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. I know this has a lot to do with Foveon sensor. But if anyone has really investigated this, I'd love to hear from them.

Silkypix appears to do a good job with the Foveon files. There's also a new version of SSP out...

[Harry Lime]

Yes, and it's also true that people around me say, "Poor old man. He's obviously demented. He has no idea he is holding his camera upside down." This is actually much to be preferred over their saying, "Don't take my picture." and hitting me.

Do you remember this guy?
;-)

[Harry Lime]

I came across two asccessories for the S90.

One solves the problem with the command dial on the rear, which appears to be pretty lose. Very clever solution, but nothing you couldn't make with a protractor and a sheet of styrene plastic...

http://tinyurl.com/36ngwg8


The other adds the ability to add 37mm filters.

http://tinyurl.com/377kd6g

http://tinyurl.com/2vmtglf


Hand grip. I'm thinking a piece of grip tack would also do the trick...

http://tinyurl.com/32nmn4r

[Bike Tourist]

Well, I guess the S90 makes images as good as my iPhone for web use or up to 8x12s.

I should point out, though, that the iPhone also checks emails and surfs the web and serves as an organizer, a stopwatch, a weather forecaster and . . . oh, I forget all the other stuff. Oh, yeah, it's a phone.

You may now ask, and rightly so, just what, exactly, is my point. It's that when I fully recover from the shock of getting rid of my D700 for an M6TTL, and when I get more than just one lousy lens for it (despite the snob appeal of one lens kind of like riding a one-speed bicycle) I will probably want a digital camera again. OK, so I want one now but can't afford it. When I do think meself ready for a digital camera again, I want one which will outperform my iPhone to some substantial degree.

[emraphoto]

Harry -

I have a DP2. It's an interesting, infuriating camera with real limitations. It's capable of beautiful images - especially if you are, say, a landscape photographer fine tuning the low ISO image, checking the histogram and the preview and then refining the shot. I wouldn't recommend it for the street. There it will drive you nuts.


Here's a pretty intelligent review.

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2009/05/sigma-dp2-review.html


Oh, and I'm still trying to figure out how to make really big prints from its raw files. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't. I know this has a lot to do with Foveon sensor. But if anyone has really investigated this, I'd love to hear from them.

i actually found the dp1 and dp2 to be quite good in the streets. i set them up in manual focus and use the little wheel on the back with distance scale. shutter lag is non existent and with the hot shoe finder it is a pretty decent rig. of course all the caveats are true... terrible battery life, clunky menus, auto focus from the 90's etc. with that being said, for a turn everything off an just snap it works pretty well in my hands.

[JohnTF]

Last fall I picked up a G9 from a friend trading up to a G10, then he sold me the G10.

I did find while spending a few months out of the country, that the G9 did a lot of what I needed, it is a smallish camera with a viewfinder, and first prints are very good up to larger than I normally print, 11x14. I had a couple of 13x18 prints made, and am pleasantly surprised.

I eventually worked through the controls (you know, if you are over 50 don't buy a digital watch unless you have a kid around to set it for you) so I could work the adjustments I cared about, was easier than most.

It is kind of an in between camera, it is too big for all but the largest of pockets, the sensor is not huge, the lens not really fast, but for a "got it with you camera" you can certainly get some decent shots you would not get if you were trying to rely on something in the size range of the iPhone, but it works.

I can see how this could evolve in to what a smaller Leica once was.

I did have my M8 with me, but for casual walking around, I tend to want to carry a few lenses with the M8, so if it is not a dedicated shooting trip, I was relying on the G9.

I had some shirts made of denim for strength, and had the pockets made for what I thought I needed. Funny thing about design, you do not normally get it right the first time, but perhaps the next time I can get it closer, with some deep pockets with secure snaps to hold a few lenses and spare batteries. Right now the G/9/10 is a start on having a camera with me more often, and the next shirt may have a pocket for it.

Regards, John

[Jamie Pillers]

I use black gaffers tape on the front grip area and a little piece on the back where my thumb normally resides. This improves the grip a lot, but it still feels a bit insecure holding such a small camera in one hand. I'm still thinking of getting the Franiek grip.

[PKR]

I think the only viable compact out there is the Ricoh GRD series (GRD III), simply because it is the only one of the bunch that has the ergonomics and feature set of a serious photographic tool. To be specific it is the only camera of the group that has extensive controls for scale focusing, which is the make or break feature in my book.

Take the LX3 / Dlux-4 for instance. Great image quality, great lens, compact size.

But you can't set the zoom to a specific focal length (24,28,35,50,60mm),
which makes it impossible to use external viewfinders, except at the widest and longest range of the zoom.

The zoom rocker is quite sensitive, making it difficult to adjust framing.

Also the camera shuts itself off after a set period of time, thus resetting where you had set the zoom.

The screen has a certain amount of lag, so it is no good for decisive moment shots. That's why these cameras need a bright-line finders or good optical viewfinder. Of course you can't see what the AF is aiming at with the brightline finder, which brings us to the next point.

Prefocusing at a specific distance is very limited. After 2 meters the focus indicator jumps to infinity. This makes scale focusing very difficult or impossible, limiting the usefulness of the camera, when it comes to making action shots.

The aperture / shutter speed controls are handled by a single, tiny joystick. It works well if you are not in a hurry, but otherwise forget it.

I spent about a week with the LX3 and it's the best digital P&S I've ever used, if all you wanted to do was take pictures of static subjects, the family standing in front of landmarks on vacation etc.

Yes, people have made some great street shots with this camera, but it is a little something of a crap shoot. You never feel like you have instant control and a certain amount of luck is needed to make anything but a static shot.

I have similar feelings about the G10.

Again, the scale focusing options are limited. I don't think you can set the zoom to a specific focal length. At least it has an optical viewfinder, but it's coverage is 77%, which makes it difficult to accurately compose a shot. Like all LCD screens and EVF there is a certain amount of lag, making it difficult to make shots, where split second timing is vital.

The Sigma DP2 also seems to get the scale focusing part right, but by most accounts it is quite quirky in many other areas. I've heard nothing but bad things about the AF system and apparently the screen is mediocre at best. The GUI is improved from the DP1, but still something of a mess.


The Oly EP-1 has many of the same problems as the other cameras. Again the scale focusing setup is not as good as that of the Ricoh and the LCD display is sluggish.


The Ricoh GR-D series (now in it's 3rd incarnation) on the other hand was designed for serious photographers.

For starters it has extensive options for scale focusing, including a very clever DOF display. Very nicely done.

Because it uses a fast prime lens you only need one bright-line finder. Obviously you still don't get the AF indicator with the bright-line finder, but the scale focusing modes are so sophisticated that with the extra DOF of the reduced size sensor it's a totally useable setup.

Aperture and shutter speed are on dials, like a DSLR.

The list goes on and on. I highly recommend downloading the manual for the GRD III and examining it's feature set.

The biggest problem with the GRD III is price and sensor size.

With the optical viewfinder you're looking at a lot of money (close to $1000?) for a small sensor camera. That's a lot of cash. You can get a low end DSLR or M4/3 for that money.

Above 400 asa it falls behind M4/3 and any upcoming APS-C camera in this category.

Ricoh also dropped the teleconverter (28mm -> 40mm), but it may resurface.


Scale focusing really is the Achilles heel of almost all of these cameras.

Think of the old LTM bodies. These were very basic cameras and in many ways similar to these digital compacts. Leica got a specific set of features right that made them viable tools for a certain type of shooting.

- Full control over scale focusing in light of the absence of a combined RF or mirror box etc.
- Good brightline viewfinders for realtime, reasonably accurate framing.
- Fast access to shutter and aperture controls
- Crisp shutter release

The EVF or LCD has too much lag for work where timing is critical, but to compensate for that you need to use an external finder. But if you don't have extensive control over scale focusing you are out of luck, because you can't use the AF with the external finder.

I hope Panasonic figured this out with the upcoming GF1 and Oly with their more advanced M4/3 model. They really need to take a look at just how right Ricoh got the interface and feature set on their GRD series.

Ultimately what we need is a digital Leica CL. Or a cheaper Leica M8... Compact cameras with real viewfinders. EVF and LCD is not going to cut it. The shutter release on many of these cameras is quite crisp, but that's a mute point if the LCD display has a 1/8th of a second or worse lag time. I would love a M4/3 camera with the spinning mirror viewfinder from the analog PEN.

But don't hold your breath. According to the fanboys optical viewfinders are for geezers and therefore we're going to be stuck with sluggish LCD and EVF finders for a long time. As is often the case in the age of digital photography, the serious shooters are at the mercy of the hordes of amateurs and weekend warriors.


Harry, Thanks for the HCB and Chim links..

If the optical finders in these cameras were better, the LCD time could be held to a minimum, conserving battery time. If the buffer size was increased, the shutter lag would be less a problem. These are small changes in the evolutuion of what might become a form factor for working photographers. Nikon has a new, non mirror box, camera in the works that will mate to a series of lenses. I think this type of digital camera will gain usage as the necessary functions are improved.

[PKR]

Do you remember this guy?
;-)

Ol' Ron's photo of Jackie crossing the street, has become an American Icon.. The chapo is a nice touch.. don't ya think. I guess Brando got the head gear installed on Ron after a previous portrait setting.

[Sam Kanga]

" Are the just introduced Canon G11 and S90 competition to the Leica M8 in terms of a small, carry-with-me compact for street photography, e.t.c.?

... Will the Bressons, Haas, Erwitts and Smiths of the near future be using small sensor digitals? Will YOU be using these cameras?

This is an important question, and I hope you will chime in with your thoughts. "

Bill


Hello, Although this question was posted a while ago, I'm just a recent member of RFF, so putting my 2 cents in now.

Great question - something I've been wrestling with for a few years, and discuss with other photographers. Fortunately over the last few years compact cameras have been improving steadily too. I'm a long time Leica M user because they are small, discreet, and allow me to compose & shoot very quickly. (I don't think this is news to readers of RFF)

To answer your question in a way: YES in my opinion there is no doubt Cartier-Bresson et al would definitely try to use small sensor digitals, and I also know that a photographer will use whatever is available and find a way to make it work. I use a small sensor digital and just find a way to work around some of the clunkiness of having to go to menus more often than I would like.

I set focus manually to a pre-set distance, so I can be ready (the same thing I do with the Leica) - but now I have to go to a menu, same for changing ISO - a lot is possible to do with current compacts, it's just a bit slower to make/change settings, so I live with it.

My thoughts: I would like to have a decent viewfinder, I actually do compose with it, and 80% is a bit too far off for me personally, and strangely, I find cameras to be too light - I'm surprised at the camera shake I get. I know the latest cameras do have steadying of some sort, I'm curious if that slows things down for a moment between squeezing the shutter and actual exposure.

- I won't make this response any longer, suffice to say, personally, I've carried Leicas around everywhere for years, so I'm fine with any camera that goes up to that size & weight if I can be just as fast (I know there is an M9 - but my name's not Rockefeller!) I will say that the current really small compacts (S90 etc.) are quite amazing for what they are.

Thanks
Sam

[peterm1]

No not for me at least. I own the G11 and like it. Its a fun camera with lots of bells and whistles that produces excellent jpg and RAW images. But it is no match for the M8. Certainly this is true in the same sense that (say) a Toyota is no match for a Mercedes Benz. And its also true in that its a small sensor camera with a fixed lens. No chance to try other lenses and virtually infinite depth of field in most instances. And its viewfinder is pretty awful. It is tiny, capturing only 77% of the image and what it does capture often bears little resemblance to what the sensor captures due to parallax issues. Having said this it does produce nice images and has its place in my camera bag for those days when taking an M8 is just not an option.

[Arjay]

I'm astonished nobody has yet mentioned the new Sony NEX 3/5. There are adapters for that camera system's bayonet to M-type lenses, so this camera could be the answer to the wishes and dreams of many of us over here on the RFF.

Can anybody offer some real hands-on experience with this camera?

I once briefly had the camera in my hands in one of the large electronics supermarkets in Germany: I liked the camera's short shutter lag (after focusing), but I was negatively surprised about the camera's loud, whirring shutter noise.

Any info on usability, or does this camera only cater to menu maniacs? How about support for manual focussing? What about IQ?

[thegman]

My brother has a NEX 5, and has started using a Nokton 35mm on it. I find usability good, better than his old GF-1. Focusing the M lens is easy enough, even without zooming.

You have delve into menus for ISO etc. but aperture can be assigned to the wheel on the back (assuming you're using a Sony lens, not M).

Image quality is par for the course for an APS sensor I think, high ISO especially good.

It's nice, small, but no EVF option, so I'd probably go for the Lumix G2 instead I think.

[nightfly]

At this point in time, I'm wondering why someone would buy a G11 or a forthcoming G12 (with the same sized sensor) when you can get something like an EP1 or the EPL1 for roughly the same price with a much bigger sensor and similar size. It seems like sometime soon Canon (and Nikon) are going to have to offer bigger sensors in smaller, non SLR bodies to compete in this market.

I can see the appeal of a single non-interchangeable lens but the compromises inherent in the small sensors in these things really undercut their appeal to the prosumer market they seem to be targeting, particularly at the $500 price point.

[Harry Lime]

New Nikon P7000

http://dpreview.com/previews/nikonp7000/

Canon G12 in the wings, maybe something from Leica at Photokina.